To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
don andrik64 – :
I need to know how the “manufacture-date” on a box of #22 can be ascertained — this will be a “gift”. A numbering “code”? where? Thanks.
mvlad – :
The reformulated Eau de Parfum is an interesting take on No. 22 that, to my nose, harkens back to the vintage Eau de Cologne. Although the vintage EdC has a wonderful animalic facet that is absent from the current EdP, the EdC and EdP share a similar subdued nature and depth that are absent from the Eau de Toilette formulation – the overall impression of the EdP is more contemplative than the bright and light-hearted spirit of the EdT. I would say that the EdP has more carnation and less vanilla, and the aldehydes of the EdP are heavier and waxier than those of the EdT, bringing to mind old books and beeswax candles rather than whipped cream and sunshine. The EdP is closest in spirit and depth to the current Parfum Extrait, so if you found the EdT to be a bit too frivolous but enjoy the Extrait, you might give the EdP a try.
Many reviews of the EdT mention girls in white, innocence, weddings, etc. The girls in white conjured by the EdP are up to something more gothic and possibly even sinister, leaving the buttoned-up garden party behind to head out to Hanging Rock to meet their fate.
qtb961Unlogrere – :
I adore N° 22, whereas I feel very ambivalent and mostly ‘meh’ about N° 5. N° 22 is pillowy, soft, floating clouds of aldehydes, florals that are creamy and sweet like whipped cream. There are no sharp edges. As the florals warm on skin a faint waft of smoke unexpectedly begins to curl upward, and this incense burn intensifies with time on skin. Brilliant. It’s one of my favorite classic Chanels, the other one being Cristalle, its 180-degree polar opposite.
anntun – :
Chanel No. 22 is a true beauty in all its various forms; whether it be the now discontinued Eau de Toilette or the newer Eau de Parfum formulation.
Chanel No.22 is like a more refined, less powdery version of Chanel No.5 to my nose. This fragrance could easily last days if showering in-between wearings was not a requirement. It’s one classic Chanel fragrance that I keep coming back to time and time again. I have had many loves from the house of Chanel, but none of them have stood the test of time like this fragrance has.
Despite falling in love with Chanel No.22 almost a decade ago, I allowed myself to mature before adding this to my wish list. It’s definitely not a fragrance for young girls. It’s lack of sugary-sweetness and somewhat fecal drydown requires a certain elegance and maturity to do this fragrance justice.
Chanel No.22 is the perfect blend of powdery, clean and sensual. It’s not as heavy as the classic No.5 EDP and has less sparkling aldehydes on my skin. In a way it’s richer and warmer; the ideal fragrance for a winter’s evening.
The differences between the EDT concentration and newer EDP are minimal. They both last just as long as one another, which is a shame actually as the EDT was much cheaper to obtain.
SmusicJazzMan – :
Absolutely gorgeous and perfect for me as the aldehydes are not strong and the fragrance is toned down but beautiful and wearable. Reminds me of No 5 edp but sweeter with a lovely sandalwood note and vanilla.
I need to test the longevity and will come back later.
igorioshka – :
Oh Chanel 22 what have they done to you..this is a holographic image of 22. 22 thrived on its natural analog richness of essences and a few chemical enhancements..much like Patou Joy.
If you have never experienced 22 ..you will be fine..however if 22 has touched u through the years..this is just an echo of its magic . Chanel what has become of you??? Disappointed.
splintercell – :
No. 22 is the less mature, but still classy sister of mother Chanel, No. 5. She hasn’t any kids, but she hosts the best dinner parties you can imagine.
First, it’s soap… then, it loses most resemblance to No. 5. The aldehydes persist, but it becomes very cosy and relaxing. Where No. 5 becomes very complex, this becomes something you needn’t think of too much. Beautiful jasmine flowers envelop you, vetiver and oakmoss make it both mossy and just a touch fresh. The standard ylang that the modern Chanels have become almost dependent on sneaks a surprisingly short peek before being buried in tuberose gorgeousness.
I’m currently wearing a squirt of the vintage No 5 EDT and two squirts of this and, while this is softer, it seems to be developing in a much more beautiful way.
саркис – :
smooth creamy almost lotiony version of N5. not bad at all
nzf570Unlogrere – :
I agree with Calvini. I can definitely smell the incense and aldehydes. It is a beautiful, sweet, floral scent also. I cheated and got an oil dupe but I think it is pretty close. Lovely and I recommend it. Slightly sweeter than no 5. Both are beautiful though 🙂
Edit: This doesn’t last a really long time but it lasts a good few hours. For some reason, I am reminded of Maroussia with this. All good.
Caurrilerie – :
This “light variation of the brilliant N°5” is actually the heaviest of them all! (since it’s not part of the commercial line which would undergo constant reformulation to cut costs & suit public opinions of the time) lol
It stays mostly linear and the drydown is mostly floral unlike N°5, but if I wanted something as rich as this (and for the price), I might as well jump straight to Amouage Fate! (Don’t let the notes fool you–it’s not an incense fragrance, more aldehydic-oriental-musky)
vlad27 – :
I only liked the n.22 EdT, and am pleasently surprised at how much I love the EdP. It is more rich and textured in my experience. Wearing most nights to bed, such a lovely way to drift into dreams.